Budget: 57 percent for the military - same old story

[JackRiddler]

Anyone care to question the accuracy of the above graphic? Can you dig into the numbers and find a way to get it under 50?

When did it last look significantly different? Administrations change, but the realm (ever evolving, to be sure) of the military-industrial complex and national security state stays in place, along with its extensive private, deep-state and parapolitical extensions.

[seabeckind]

1. Ooops, that looks very bad...

Time to redo the pie by adding social security and medicare. That'll make the military spending look more reasonable.

Doesn't matter that there are 3 totally separate revenue streams. It's all in perception and deception.

[geckosfeet]

2. Social security? That would be an income from taxes - Social security is funded by working people.

Yes - the government collects and distributes it, but the money is basically going from the worker, to the government back to the worker.

But I think I take your point - it is part of the overall administrative spending effort the government undertakes.

Some how I see it as different than the often times unpaid for and growing budgets of the military etc.

[seabeckind]

9. Yep...different revenue stream

On the pay stub there's 3 numbers and they go into 3 buckets in the Treas.

It's that deception thing. Make a chart showing the 3 streams, the 3 budgets, together and it looks more like we really need to cut "entitlements". What they really want to cut is the bidness part of SS an medicare contributions. They don't care what we people have to put in the bucket...just what they have to put in.

The corporations would repeal the 13th amendment if they could.

[JackRiddler]

5. Well, Johnson did that...

So you have a consolidated budget that includes legally mandated spending on the so-called entitlements (the stuff everyone pays for as social insurance). They never did manage to get rid of the "discretionary spending" category, just to obscure it in the coverage.

[yeoman6987]

10. Military spending encompasses a lot more than just the military

For example, where do you think all the money is coming from searching for the lost aircraft? So much of the military budget is used for other things like natural disasters throughout the world. If it was just military spending, I would agree it was too much, but it is so much more.

[JackRiddler]

13. I'm so glad it's humanitarian.

That use of existing gear to search for the plane must account for what, 0.001% of this year's Pentagon? Impossible to imagine any non-military agency performing such functions, right? Thanks!

[Scuba]

15. That's hilarious, almost worthy of a DUzy.

[JackRiddler]

18. Thanks for posting the following on your journal, Scuba...

[Scuba]

19. You're welcome.

[Democracyinkind]

33. LoL.

We can hardly afford military hardware nowadays since most of our "defense" budget is spent on humanitarian causes!

Won't someone think of the MIC, for god's sake!!!1!!1

Ah, DU...

[LanternWaste]

51. US Coast Guard receives the lion's share of SAR duties and spend app. 360 million annually on that

US Coast Guard receives the lion's share of SAR duties and spends app. 360 million dollars annually on that; in other words, the cost of two (2) F-35 fighter jets.

From this, I conclude that the vast majority of income used by the armed services are military rather than humanitarian in nature, and suggesting, or implying that is is "so much more" than military spending is, at best a wee bit disingenuous when considering we have higher spending on military than the next seventeen countries... combined.

[NobodyHere]

3. The post is misleading

You're title says " Budget: 57 percent for the military - same old story"

But your graph is for discretionary spending, which is separate from medicare, medicaid, social security, debt interest etc...

[JackRiddler]

6. That's the consolidated budget.

Last edited Fri Apr 18, 2014, 10:09 AM - Edit history (1)

The discretionary budget is the part up for debate. (And of course, "discretionary" is in the damn title of the graphic, but neveryoumind.)

[NobodyHere]

23. So why not title your post to reflect the actual description of the graph?

nt

[L0oniX]

29. With a military this large there has to be some misleading.

[seabeckind]

4. Question as to the graph

Aren't there chunk of defense spending in other categories, like energy? I thought nukes were controlled by energy.

Veterans benefits are shown as separate from defense but aren't they the pension programs?

What about the state dept security stuff?

Or the NSA and CIA?

I think if you dig deeper the defense spending is higher.

[JackRiddler]

8. The way this works...

is that CIA, NSA, etc.* and the part of Energy devoted to the nuclear weapons programs are included, but veterans benefits are not direct military spending (they are largely costs of past wars that one can add in other reckonings that might also include the part of the interest payments attributable to past military spending).

* The "intelligence" arm is funded in a black budget included in the Pentagon's. Tim Shorrock has done the work of figuring out the total, last time I knew the figure it was $57 billion in secret spending, i.e. not itemized in declassified publications as of around 2009.

[wercal]

7. Can you dig into the numbers and find a way to get it under 50?

Include non-discretionary spending.

Give the man some credit - military spending dropped from 2012 to 2013, and the 2014 estimate is for another reduction....and the 2015 budget is below 2013 numbers.

[seabeckind]

11. Thank you...

The deception part. Does make it look like what the gop screams about, doesn't it?

[newthinking]

49. Exactly - That is how the Republicans want people to see it

Thank you for pointing that out.

[JackRiddler]

12. This is the consolidated budget.

The spending on Medicare & Social Security is legally mandated. There's a whole separate taxation for that, you may have heard of it. They keep separate accounts for it, even have something called a trust fund into which the annual surplus in these taxes goes. (Amazing, no?) The discretionary budget is how your government chooses to spend what isn't automatically mandated as an entitlement.

[wercal]

16. Pssst. I have a secret

Come closer....closer...

The two budgets are related.

For decades, the general fund borrowed from the SS fund, during a period of time where SS ran in the Black. A few years ago, it went into the Red. So that annual surplus of which you speak....isn't there. So now its time for the general fund to repay the SS fund. More importantly, the true nature of the annual deficit can no longer be masked by intra-governmental transfers from the SS fund. The two budgets are hopelessly intertwined.

Why not show all of the information, and trust that people are smart enough to figure it out? More information is better, right? I mean...you know...the website you got the one chart from had both charts sitting side by side, right?

You are implying that the president is the new boss...just like the old boss, even while defense spending is flat. If you are going to make that claim, I would certainly suggest not hiding information.

[JackRiddler]

17. No one's suppressing your "secret."

Thanks for the lesson in what everyone on this site knows. So? The OP graphic shows the part of the budget not mandated legally under the social insurance laws. The government still keeps the category of "discretionary budget," maybe you should complain to them for allowing the form of clarity that looking at the discretionary budget allows.

Damn you New York Times, you also sometimes publish such graphics.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html

Why does the above allow one to click on "hide mandatory spending" and thus see the discretionary budget?

[wercal]

21. You give a link to a 2010 NY Times Article?

....that does exactly what I've said - provide all of the available information.

You should follow that example.

[grahamhgreen]

34. This is how the right wing infiltrates and lies to the people. Military is killing us all.

[oldhippie]

27. Medicare is not fully funded by separate taxation

Only part of it is funded by the "medicare" tax on your paystub. The rest comes from the general fund.

[Scuba]

14. If we can't afford to educate our children, to heal our sick or care for our elderly ...

... just what is it the defense budget is defending?

[erronis]

39. Excellent

Only those with open minds will agree...

[TBF]

48. It is defending the people who make

the biggest campaign contributions.

[Jefferson23]

20. Sickening. K&R

[Swede Atlanta]

22. Military needs to be no more than 20-25%

This is ridiculous......the boys and girls at the Pentagon need to go on a big diet.......

I have no problem re-directing money currently spent on the military to infrastructure, education, science, energy and environment, etc.

It might be a painful transition and the MIC would be mighty mad but they would find new markets for their services in areas that actually benefit people rather than kill them.

I wish you could indicate on your tax return which areas you want to fund. I would give 5% to military and the rest spread out across worthwhile, meaningful departments and services.

[Octafish]

24. Take out the profit and things will change.

Nationalize the Defense industries, so there's no more "Money trumps peace."

[Moostache]

31. Makes too much sense, therefore its impossible to happen...

A nationalized defense industry, which in my view would also incorporate Energy and Science spending to force the nation to address the need for different thinking on energy sources, distribution and usage, would be a nearly ideal solution to throwing good money after bad. It might mean a lot less money for additional ships and planes and tanks and missiles that are not actually in use, but it would kick start an explosion in science researching and energy spending and maybe get our collective head removed from our ass.

It worked in the past...when the nation spent money on development projects and big ticket items like the Apollo project and NASA, we created the backbone of what has become the technology economy and modern way of life. Its past time for a similar investment in the future and if it takes using the military via forced budgetary means, then so be it.

[Octafish]

37. You are talking my language, Moostache: Democracy can accomplish most anything.

For the cost of Iraq War, we could've built National 100% Renewable Clean Energy Grid. I kid you not:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/for-the-price-of-the-iraq-war-the-u-s-could-have-a-100-renewable-power-system/5330881

But, no. In the time of greatest wealth in human history, the People "deserve" austerity.

[Ohio Joe]

25. Fear is such an easy sell...

For all the chest thumping that goes on, it sure is easy to get govt dollars based on fear.

I bet if we cut that number down to the 3-5% range and used the 50+ percent saved to help people, we would not have very much to fear from anyone.

[randys1]

26. A standing army is not what we are suppose to have...

I am against most military period, and then Putin comes along, with the brain and maturity of a 12 yr old, and i wonder if we actually might need a military for once.

We havent needed it since WWII, everything we have done since then has been bullshit.

[JackRiddler]

53. Please don't fall for the New Cold War.

Putin is not a threat to the United States, or even to Europe outside some of the former USSR.

[randys1]

54. He has thousands of nukes

Pakistan has nukes, it is a dangerous world.

The question is where do we fit in the whole thing...

[L0oniX]

28. When is this going to piss off people enough to do something about it??????????????

If you think Hillary will help reduce this over the top extreme war machine you are living in la la land.

[Bigmack]

30. But....but....but....

...we need a huge Army and Navy and like that!

The Chinese are coming on strong! They have an aircraft carrier! It can't fly planes off, but it's a carrier. We only have 10 super-carriers.

We need the F-35! No mission, can't fly worth shit, and has poor rear visibility, but we need it! By 2020 China will possess maybe 1,000 fighters... 50 of those fighters will be of the latest, stealthy J-20. We'll only have 3,000...1,000 of which will be stealth.

They're catching up! We've got to build up! More money for the military!

USA!!!111 USA!!!1

[bulloney]

32. Food & Agriculture: 1%

That's where food stamps and farm program funding comes from. Yet, we hear the conservatives scream bloody murder about how these two areas are breaking the bank and causing all of the deficit spending. Yet, you don't hear a peep from these same people regarding military spending.

[grahamhgreen]

35. Keepin it real.

[Kaleva]

36. Much lower then back in the 1950's when it accounted for over 60% of the entire budget.

[JackRiddler]

38. Why this can be misleading...

I hope it displays (pngs are problematic), but it's from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending#United_States_of_America

So what we see is that total government spending as % of GDP rose from a level of 20% in mid-1950s to 25+ in the 2000s. (This includes all government, and is probably further problematic in how "defense" is defined.) Most of this was due to the rise in pensions (social security) and health spending. Until 1975 (end of Vietnam), "defense" declined by this measure, but has remained stable since, with the biggest drop in the 1990s and the big bump up after 9/11. It's been stable through the 2000s by this measure.

More important is that a) most of this is a pulverization of wealth has always been unrelated to "defense" and b) this stability in absolute spending maintains a vast military empire and the MIC with attendant lobby. Spending on it gives it its power to shape society, policy and the world.

It's very important that this is the discretionary budget - unlike SS and health programs, it's the money that can be spent otherwise. It's our common surplus wealth. It's our investment fund, and it's invested to maintain a machinery of violence, surveillance, and murder against a world that just about equals (in all defense budgets combined) the U.S. military spending. To use a biological analogy, it may not weigh much (like a part of the brain, or your hormonal glands), but it has an executive function. It's one of the main drivers of the system, in fact the biggest public one (with financial sector as the biggest private driver).

[ErikJ]

40. In 1997 Defense spending was one third what it is today

and 46% of the discretionary budget.

[JackRiddler]

41. Yeah! But not one-third.

So it's gotten much worse as an eater of wealth.

It was lower but one-third is surely incorrect; must not be accounting for inflation.

[Doctor_J]

43. The president's worried about our "meh" attitude for Nov

This is unlikely to help, imo

[Zorra]

44. I feel totally cheated when my tax money funds the private World Police Force of the Oligarchy.

“Our strategy should be not only to confront empire, but to lay siege to it. To deprive it of oxygen. To shame it. To mock it. With our art, our music, our literature, our stubbornness, our joy, our brilliance, our sheer relentlessness – and our ability to tell our own stories. Stories that are different from the ones we’re being brainwashed to believe.

The corporate revolution will collapse if we refuse to buy what they are selling – their ideas, their version of history, their wars, their weapons, their notion of inevitability.

Remember this: We be many and they be few. They need us more than we need them...."

Arundhati Roy

[toddwv]

45. Add veteran's benefits and it easily tops 60%

Then there's the strain on the SS/Medicare and other social systems that take up the slack for many other veterans.

The interest on the massive debt due to two long-term and expensive wars.


The military is bleeding us dry.

[JackRiddler]

52. Of course, but we don't want to cut those.

Cut the military spending in half and you can double the benefits and still have 90% of the savings left over for human needs and eco-investment.

[toddwv]

55. I agree.

But ALL costs of war should be upfront and not buried in other agencies that are at first glance not associated with the military.

[colsohlibgal]

46. The Defense Budget Is Out Of Hand

We keep building tanks we never ever use, it took over 2 decades to cut funding for a plane the military would not fly. And screwdrivers don't cost $125.

We could likely spend half or less of what we do and still be as safe as we can be. If we did that we could divert cash and personnel to fix all our infrastructure, crumbing before our eyes.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. You'd think, with all that spending, they could win a war occasionally.

Maybe they should forgo the endless, and useless, wars and spend the money on something useful.

[Hutzpa]

50. This is so freaking depressing

[Rex]

56. YEP. We could end world hunger with that much money...but we like to waste billions and billions

or we like to make sure the people that are the Haves can continue to gain an unlimited amount of money...all off the idea of a national defense!

Biggest scam ever. Biggest crime ever.

[Angleae]

57. It would be easy to get it under 50% if people would stop pretending that graphic is the budget.

It's actually 22.4% of the federal budget.

[JackRiddler]

58. The graphic is the discretionary budget.

Exactly as labeled.

Given that the other parts are mandated by law and collected by a separate system of taxation that is in surplus, this is the "moral document" of which the current in the series of office-holders speaks.

Is this how you justify spending 700-1000 billion a year on the military death machine? "Oh, it's not that much!" Do you think it has a noble function, perhaps, maintaining 800 bases around the world, thousands of nukes, 13 carrier groups, contingency plans to invade and destroy every spot on the globe, covert ops against democracies, a torture archipelago, etc. etc.?